A systematic review and economic model of the effectiveness and ...

TABLE 93 Results of sensitivity analysis employing treatment-specific utility values
© Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2006. All rights reserved.
Health Technology Assessment 2006; Vol. 10: No. 23
Strategy Order of treatments received Cost (£) QALYs Cost per QALY (£)
(compared with)
1 IR-MPH – ATX – DEX – no treatment 1,237 0.9141 ED
2 ER-MPH8 – ATX – DEX – no treatment 1,474 0.9264 D
3 ER-MPH12 – ATX – DEX – no treatment 1,481 0.9228 D
4 ATX – IR-MPH – DEX – no treatment 1,484 0.9329 D
5 ATX – ER-MPH8 – DEX – no treatment 1,554 0.9361 31,107 (vs 11)
6 ATX – ER-MPH12 – DEX – no treatment 1,566 0.9359 D
7 IR-MPH – DEX – ATX – no treatment 1,144 0.9085 D
8 ER-MPH8 – DEX – ATX – no treatment 1,340 0.9176 ED
9 ER-MPH12 – DEX – ATX – no treatment 1,413 0.9190 ED
10 ATX – DEX – IR-MPH – no treatment 1,470 0.9330 15,448 (vs 16)
11 ATX – DEX – ER-MPH8 – no treatment 1,489 0.9340 20,173 (vs 10)
12 ATX – DEX – ER-MPH12 – no treatment 1,491 0.9287 D
13 DEX – IR-MPH – ATX – no treatment 1,103 0.9088 –
14 DEX – ER-MPH8 – ATX – no treatment 1,161 0.9117 D
15 DEX – ER-MPH12 – ATX – no treatment 1,163 0.9107 D
16 DEX – ATX – IR-MPH – no treatment 1,162 0.9131 13,539 (vs 13)
17 DEX– ATX – ER-MPH8 – no treatment 1,181 0.9140 ED
18 DEX– ATX – ER-MPH12 – no treatment 1,183 0.9138 D
19 No treatment 1,228 0.8780 D
D, ruled out by dominance; ED, ruled out by extended dominance.
Probabliity cost-effective
1.0
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Strategy 13
Strategy 16
Strategy 10
Strategy 11
0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000
Willingness to pay per QALY (£)
13
16
10
11
5
Strategy 5
FIGURE 24 Cost-effectiveness acceptability frontier showing the optimal strategies in a sensitivity analysis employing treatmentspecific
utility values
113